We all have our personal views about altering images. I personally strive to get the image as close to perfect as possible straight from the camera. Past that point most of my editing is limited to minor tonal, color and sharpening adjustments in that order. I shoot 100% RAW to get the best quality image file possible. Also, I shoot 99.99% of my images with a tripod to ensure the best possible composition, framing, & cropping (at most 2-3% are cropped after shooting). When I do more than this in terms of image alteration, I attempt to clearly state what was done - for example, this is a montage created by overlaying two separate images....., or this is.....
HOWEVER, this image demonstrates an instance where alteration clearly enhances the final product. If this were your image - either as maker or client - which would you choose? I guess that my point is there are times when what comes straight from the camera could stand some improvement (I'm assuming you're not in a competition where the rules forbid significant alteration). Why would you not do something similar to what's illustrated here? When it comes to personal enjoyment of an image, to not produce the best image possible is silly IMHO. Let the comments begin. Joe?